Fairness has become an increasingly touchy point for many in the crypto industry. While the concern has been at the back of mind of many retail investors, it recently spilled into the public conversation with the release of Cobie’s substack article, uproar around token distribution models from protocols like Renzo, and the overall positive sentiment towards fair memecoin launches. As traditional projects often lean heavily on VC backing, a growing sentiment among retail investors has sparked a shift around fair launch mechanics.

Memecoins have become a focal point of this cycle for reasons that go beyond the obvious ones such as viral appeal, social media presence, funny memes, and high returns. At their core, many memecoins epitomize the principle of fair launch. Unlike VC-backed tokens that often grant early access and significant advantages to institutional investors, memecoins typically offer equal opportunity for all participants right from the start. This perceived fairness has resonated deeply within the broader crypto community.

The biggest winners of this cycle have been memes characterized by the value provided to early investors and supporters as opposed to insiders. Projects like $WIF have completely captured the cultural zeitgeist, becoming a symbol of the promise of crypto. The meteoric rise and entrenched presence of communities like $WIF and $MICHI is proof that projects that gain traction through grassroots movements and community engagement can be sustainable in the long run. The message is clear: everyone gets a fair shot.

The disillusionment with VC-backed tokens stems from the opaque and sometimes inequitable distribution processes. These projects frequently reserve substantial portions of their token supply for early investors, leaving retail participants at a disadvantage. The subsequent price fluctuations, driven by token unlocks, only exacerbate the frustration among everyday investors who feel sidelined and exploited.

Data from Cobie’s recent article highlights this issue starkly and points out that the problem has only gotten worse. Solana's seed round investors enjoyed a return of approximately 4,000x, while the best public market buyers could achieve was around 300x. A couple years later, Optimism's (OP) seed round returns were about 183x for seed investors, compared to just 6x for public buyers. And most recently with StarkNet (STRK), seed investors saw 138x returns, while public investors are currently in the red. This divergence underscores the imbalance created by VC funding, where the majority of the upside is captured privately, leaving little room for public market participants to experience any upside.

In contrast, the fair launch model seeks to address these imbalances by ensuring that no one has an unfair advantage. Every participant, regardless of their financial clout, gets the same opportunity to invest at the same price. This ethos of transparency is in stark contrast to the token distribution models seen in traditional VC-backed projects. Platforms like Cobie’s echo.xyz are trying to change this by providing small investors the same access to early stage projects via pooled angel investing. Echo would allow startups to raise funds from a broader segment of retail investors, providing an alternative for startups that are looking to prioritize community. It’s still no easy task to launch a product like this: complexity on the backend and costs surrounding manual human operations can make it hard to scale Echo to the extent it needs to. Furthermore, the success of a platform like this would require sustained venture capital-esque ROIs (or at least significantly greater than buying tokens post TGE) which is no small feat.

It’s important to note that VC investors are not solely to blame. Major undertakings like Optimism require millions of dollars of funding in seed rounds to ensure that a project can focus on building their product instead of constantly worrying about tokenomics and funding their teams. VCs also provide meaningful guidance and support for startups to succeed in the market, yet large funds seem to take a disproportionate amount of the returns.

Startups nowadays either get funded from angels, join crypto startup school type rounds, or get locked in to deals straight out of hackathons. With the amount of centralization around large funds doing traditional pre-seed rounds, it’s making it difficult for small funds and DAOs to invest in these projects. Even so, the biggest issue retail faces is the major price discovery happening in OTC markets and project valuation explosion due to increased demand from institutional investors.

At this point, even large protocols are taking note of this dynamic. AO, a new protocol built on Arweave’s permanent data storage layer, promises a 100% fair launch, free from pre-mining, pre-sales, or preferential access. Community members can mint AO tokens by bridging to the protocol, holding Arweave’s native AR token, or contributing to the project. This approach ensures that the community and institutional investors have full and equal access to the token supply. With a total supply of 21 million coins and a four-year halving cycle similar to Bitcoin, AO stands as a testament to the renewed commitment to fairness in crypto.

As the crypto landscape continues to evolve, it's clear that the community's voice is growing louder. Fair launches don’t seem like just a trend; they represent a fundamental shift towards a more retail investor centered future for digital assets. Whether through memecoins or even large protocols like AO, the message is the same: fair launch mechanics matter.